Blog Archives

Top Scientist: Fluoride Already Shown to Cause 10,000 Cancer Deaths

Mike Barrett

Infowars.com

2012 April 14

Water fluoridation is a highly controversial topic, with many individuals voicing massive concern over the practice. In contrast, some stick to the concept that there isn’t any association between fluoride and any real negative effects. Fluoride, however, is indeed a toxic substance, and has been tied with numerous health complications in well-established research. Fluoride can be found in many water supplies, toothpaste, and even food at alarming levels. While it may sound shocking to many, some research is even drawing a close connection between fluoride and an increased cancer risk.

Yiamouyiannis documents research showing that fluoride increases the tumor growth rate by 25% at only 1 ppm, produces melanotic tumors, transforms normal cells into cancer cells and increases the carcinogenesis of other chemicals. For the original references to these studies, refer to Yiamouyiannis’ pamphlet, Lifesavers Guide to Fluoridation.

In 1997, it was shown that fluoridation caused about 10,000 cancer deaths in epidemiological studies by Dr. Dean Burk, former head of the Cytochemistry Section at the National Cancer Institute and Yiamouyiannis. Despite the findings occurring in 1997, they were not reluctantly released until 1989. After analyzing the study results in rats, it was found that animals who drank fluoridated water:

Showed an increase in tumors and cancers in oral squamous cells.

Developed a rare form of bone cancer called osteosarcoma.

Showed an increased in thyroid follicular cell tumors.

Developed a rare form of liver cancer known as hepatocholangiocarcinoma.

Other research resurfaced by Dr. Dean Burk, former chief of cytochemistry at the National Cancer Institute for 30 years, also shows that fluoride increases the cancer death rate. Dr Burk refers to a study conducted which compares the 10 largest U.S. cities with fluoridation and the 10 largest without. What researchers found was that following fluoridation, deaths from cancer went up immediately- in as little as a year.

To reduce fluoride levels to a the greatest degree, activists must demand that the government stop fluoridating the water supplies. Water fluoridation has not only been linked to an increased cancer risk, but a decreased IQ in children. In fact, the findings forced the government to call for lower fluoridation levels nationwide. Until water fluoridation comes to a halt, the easiest way to reduce fluoride exposure is to invest in a reverse osmosis water filtration system. Drinking distilled water for 3-6 months may also reduce the soft tissue fluoride levels, but not bone levels. Soft tissue fluoride levels cause the greatest health problems.

The moral collapse of Western Medicine

S. D. Wells

2012 April 3

How in the world did the U.S. change from having the best scientists in the world who were discovering vitamins, minerals, vaccines and cures for disease, to modern times, where the only medicine available is toxic with horrific side effects, and where nutrient-void, chemical-laden food is being sold at almost every restaurant and grocery store, all in the name of corporate profits that keep the public sick and in need of expensive care?

In the early 1900’s, America was chock full of small farms and families who ate fresh food from those farms. Cancer, diabetes, heart disease and Alzheimer’s barely existed because the soil was rich in nutrients and minerals, and if you did get sick, a doctor would come to your home and give you some herbal tinctures or natural remedies, and that was that.

Then, after World War II, many families left their rural farms and moved closer to factories and began eating processed food that was canned and bagged, lacking the nutrients they had just a decade earlier. Then, fast food operations like McDonalds and Burger King opened up franchises all over America, feeding the public saturated fat and sugar-loaded meals that were hot, cheap, and convenient.

The United States of America is the land of the free and the home of … toxic food and venomous medicine, with chronic care waiting for its next 80 million victims. Here are some basic statistics of a country riddled with disease:

• Cancer: 1,500,000 diagnosed each year; over 50% will die of it.
• Diabetes: 25,000,000 people are diabetics right now (including children); 80,000,000 are borderline.
• Heart Disease and Strokes: 81,000,000 (every third adult) has some type of cardiovascular disease.
• Alzheimer’s Disease: 5,400,000 have Alzheimer’s right now (every 8th senior)
• Birth defects: One in every 33 babies is born with one (accounts for 20% of all infant deaths). (http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/birthdefects/data.html)

Most U.S. politicians have no ethics and no morals

Once upon a time, insider trading was a scary law that meant prison time for those who violated it. Now, politicians make money off wars they declare themselves, and health insurance companies invest in fast food operations that slowly kill their own clients. Pharmaceutical companies (Merck, Pfizer, Bayer, Bristol Meyers, etc.) are run by CEO’s who served as Governors, Senators, and heads of the FDA, and the Supreme Court itself seats Judges who worked for major pharmaceutical firms, and who will return to those jobs after writing new legislation to benefit their current investments.

Make no mistake, the pesticides used on most U.S. farms give humans cancer, and the politicians who support genetically mutated foods know it. GMO means that the seedlings of fruits and vegetables are spliced with toxic pesticides in a lab, so even if you wash off your food, you are still eating dioxin, the same toxic chemical (Agent Orange) the U.S. dumped on Vietnam which gave our own soldiers cancer. (http://people.oregonstate.edu/~muirp/pesthist.htm)

The agencies you trust so much (FDA/CDC/AMA/CDC/ACS/Major Insurance Companies) support toxic food and toxic medicine

Politicians are supposed to represent the greater good of the people, but now politics is about bastardizing the system for as much money as possible before getting ousted from office 4 years later. Food, medicine and vaccines have become toxic catapults for profiteering by Big Pharma and Government agencies (undercover corporations).

Pork: Did Leviticus 11:7 Have It Right?

Dr. Mercola

2012 March 1

Pigs are scavenger animals and will eat just about anything, alive, sick or dead. Their appetite for less-than-wholesome foods makes pigs a breeding ground for potentially dangerous infections. Even cooking pork for long periods is not enough to kill many of the retroviruses and other parasites that many of them harbor.

Levitical guidelines label the pig an “unclean” animal, and prohibit the consumption of pork.

Regardless of your spiritual beliefs, there may be good reason to carefully consider your decision to include pork as part of your diet, as despite advertising campaigns trying to paint pork as a “healthy” alternative to beef, research suggests it may be hazardous to your health on multiple levels.

Pork consumption has a strong epidemiological association with cirrhosis of the liver — in fact, it may be more strongly associated with cirrhosis than alcohol (although some have questioned the studies that indicate this, and point out that countries with high pork consumption tend to have low obesity rates.)

Other studies also show an association between pork consumption and liver cancer as well as multiple sclerosis.

What’s behind this data?

Most U.S. Pigs are Fed Grains, Making Them High in Inflammatory Omega-6 Fats

One contributing factor is the diet upon which the pigs are raised, which will impact the level of polyunsaturated omega-6 fat it contains.

Too many polyunsaturated fats (PUFAs) contribute to chronic inflammation, which causes all sorts of problems over the long-term. Inflammation is at the source of just about every chronic disease we see today.

Most pigs raised in the United States are fed grains and possibly seed oils, which dramatically increase their omega-6 content, as well as the highly inflammatory byproduct of omega-6 fatty acid metabolism: arachadonic acid. According to the Weston A. Price Foundation, lard from pigs fed this type of diet may be 32 percent PUFAs. On the other hand, lard from pigs raised on pasture and acorns had a much lower PUFA content, at 8.7 percent, while those fed a Pacific Island diet rich in coconut had even less, only 3.1 percent.i

About one third of the staff at Mercola.com is based in the Philippines where pork is a very popular part of their diet. However, unlike the U.S. in which most of the pigs are fed grains, most of the pig diet in the Philippines is vegetable based. My staff tells me that there is a dramatic difference in the taste. So it is possible that many of the adverse consequences being ascribed to pork may be related to the pigs’ diet.

As reported by Dr. Paul Jaminet, a trained astrophysicist and his wife Shou-Ching, a Harvard biomedical scientist, who together authored the book Perfect Health Diet:

“So the omega-6 content can cover a 10-fold range, 3% to 32%, with the highest omega-6 content in corn- and wheat-fed pigs who have been caged for fattening. Corn oil and wheat germ oil are 90% PUFA, and caging prevents exercise and thus inhibits the disposal of excess PUFA. Caging is a common practice in industrial food production.”

Consumption of this PUFA-rich meat may very well be a factor in liver disease, as studies show feeding mice corn oil (rich in omega-6) and alcohol (which is metabolically similar to fructose) induces liver disease,ii and omega-6 fats have also been linked to cirrhosis of the liver.

However, even though most pork in the United States is likely to be high in omega-6 fats, it is not the largest contributor of omega-6 fats in the U.S. diet — this honor goes to vegetable oils. Dr. Jaminet continues:

“Either fructose or alcohol can react with polyunsaturated fat to produce liver disease. Sugar consumption, for example in soft drinks, may be just as likely to combine with pork to cause a cirrhotic liver as alcohol. But no other common dietary component can substitute for the role of polyunsaturated fat in causing liver disease.

… We would expect that if pork can cause liver cirrhosis it will also promote liver cancer, since injured and inflamed tissues are more likely to become cancerous. Indeed, there is an association between pork consumption and the primary liver cancer. … But fat composition is hardly likely to be the sole issue with pork. Most polyunsaturated fats in modern diets are derived from vegetable oils, not pork. It seems that there must be something else in pork besides polyunsaturated fat that is causing liver disease.”

Most Pork is Consumed in Processed Form

Another reason to reconsider pork, in theory, would be the fact that most is consumed in processed form. Dr. Jaminet reports that in the U.S., pork consumption can be broken down as follows:

Smoked ham 28%

Sausage 13%

Bacon 6%

Processed lunchmeat 6%

Other forms of processed pork 10%

Processed meats are those preserved by smoking, curing or salting, or the addition of chemical preservatives. Particularly problematic are the nitrates that are added to these meats as a preservative, coloring and flavoring. The nitrates found in processed meats are frequently converted into nitrosamines, which are clearly associated with an increased risk of certain cancers. It’s for this reason that the USDA actually requires adding ascorbic acid (vitamin C) or erythorbic acid to bacon cure, as it helps reduce the formation of nitrosamines.

Meat cooked at high temperatures, as many processed meats often are, can also contain as many as 20 different kinds of heterocyclic amines, or HCAs for short. These substances are also linked to cancer. Heating meat at high temperatures also appears to increase the formation of nitrosamines, with well-done or burned bacon having significantly more nitrosamines than less well-done bacon.

Many processed meats are also smoked as part of the curing process, and smoking is a well-known cause of carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, which enter your food during the smoking process.

So it’s known that eating processed meats exposes you to at least three cancer-causing substances: nitrates and nitrites (leading to nitrosamines), heterocyclic amines, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Ironically, despite this known connection, Dr. Jaminet reports that liver cancer appears to be even more strongly associated with the consumption of fresh pork than processed pork, which suggests another causative factor.

Warning: graphic imagery

‘US destroys world with DU ammunition’

A slow genocide is resulting from the use of uranium munitions by the US and NATO in numerous countries around the world.

A new report shows US forces have used massive amounts of DU in Afghanistan — causing a huge number of congenital deformities and cancers.

Several UN human rights commissions have prohibited the use of depleted uranium on humans, including during military conflicts.

However, the US government has used weaponized depleted uranium on humans, including: 340 tons during the first [Persian] Gulf war in 1991; every missile used during the 1998 Yugoslavian invasion; at least 1,000 tons in Afghanistan in 2001; and 2,400 tons in Iraq in 2003.

Depleted uranium is radioactive and extremely destructive to humans – with a half-life of 4.5 billion years. In other words, it takes 4.5 billion years for one kilogram of depleted uranium to reduce to a half a kilogram- – meaning that the US has contaminated certain countries almost forever.

Press TV has interviewed Dr. Mohammad Daud Miraki, Afghan activist, writer and politician from Chicago in an extraordinary and alarming account of off-the-chart child deformities and cancer rates of certain populations in Afghanistan and in other nations attributed to uranium bombs they received courtesy of US and or British forces – a NATO war crime that continues today. What follows is an approximate transcript of the interview.

The Gerson Therapy

Healing Your Body with the Gerson Therapy

With its whole-body approach to healing, the Gerson Therapy naturally reactivates your body’s magnificent ability to heal itself – with no damaging side-effects. Over 200 articles in respected medical literature, and thousands of people cured of their “incurable” diseases document the Gerson Therapy’s effectiveness. The Gerson Therapy is one of the few treatments to have a 60 year history of success.

The Gerson Therapy is a powerful, natural treatment that boosts your body’s own immune system to heal cancer, arthritis, heart disease, allergies, and many other degenerative diseases. One aspect of the Gerson Therapy that sets it apart from most other treatment methods is its all-encompassing nature. An abundance of nutrients from thirteen fresh, organic juices are consumed every day, providing your body with a superdose of enzymes, minerals and nutrients. These substances then break down diseased tissue in the body, while enemas aid in eliminating the lifelong buildup of toxins from the liver.

Throughout our lives our bodies are being filled with a variety of disease and cancer causing pollutants. These toxins reach us through the air we breathe, the food we eat, the medicines we take and the water we drink. As more of these poisons are used every day and cancer rates continue to climb, being able to turn to a proven, natural, detoxifying treatment like the Gerson Therapy is not only reassuring, but necessary.

Although its philosophy of cleansing and reactivating the body is simple, the Gerson Therapy is a complex method of treatment requiring significant attention to detail. While many patients have made full recoveries practicing the Gerson Therapy on their own, for best results we encourage starting treatment at a licensed Gerson treatment center.

EU bans naked body scanners because of cancer risk, US continues to coerce travelers through them

Jonathan Benson

2011 November 21

The European Commission has issued new guidelines for the use of naked body scanners at European airports. Only scanners that use millimeter wave technology, a type of low-energy radio wave that does not cause radioactive damage, will be permitted for use in the EU — the backscatter X-ray variety commonly used in the US will be off limits due to safety concerns.

Unlike the US Transportation Security Administration (TSA), which continues to insist that the backscatter machines are safe, EU regulators have admitted that this is not the case. Not only are these ionizing radiation machines now restricted throughout Europe, but the use of even millimeter wave machines also continues to remain optional for nation states that choose to use them.

“In order not to risk jeopardizing citizens’ health and safety, only security scanners which do not use X-ray technology are added to the list of authorised methods for passenger screening at EU airports,” says the commission’s press release announcement. “All other technologies, such as that used for mobiles (sic) phones and others, can be used provided that they comply with EU security standards.”

This approach to public safety is a far cry from the one US regulators are taking. Even though backscatter X-ray machines are not at all necessary, the TSA, under the umbrella of the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), continues to bend over backwards in support of the machines, even when this includes openly denying the fact that they can cause cancer (http://www.naturalnews.com/030607_n…).

New evidence chemotherapy for breast cancer causes brain damage

S. L. Baker

2011 November 15

Primary breast cancer (meaning a breast malignancy that hasn’t spread to other parts of the body) isn’t usually thought of as causing neurological problems. After all, if cancer hasn’t spread to the brain, why would it? Researchers have been forced to wonder about the answer to that question because a growing body of evidence over the past several years strongly suggests that women with breast cancer are at increased risk for not only problems with brain function but with actual alterations in their brain structure, too.

It turns out, according to a report just published in the November issue of the Archives of Neurology, that it’s not the cancer but the treatment for breast cancer — specifically chemotherapy — that could be causing a significant amount of the neurological impairment with poor outcomes seen in women with breast cancer.

Shelli R. Kesler, Ph.D., and colleagues at Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, conducted an observational study to investigate whether patterns of brain activation differed between breast cancer survivors who were treated with chemotherapy and those who didn’t have chemo. The research team also compared the brain activity of these breast cancer survivors to the brain activity of healthy women who were cancer-free.

In all, the study involved 25 women with breast cancer who received chemotherapy, 19 women with breast cancer who did not undergo chemotherapy, and 18 healthy female controls. All the research subjects were matched for age and other variables. The women were asked to perform a variety of tasks while the scientists used functional MRIs to measure and document activation in several areas of the women’s brains.